PAK-FA, T-50: News #4

Are they the same configuration per radar? Don't know. That's all I know. Could be different radar config altogether to test. But that wouldn't make much sense.

Maybe they just want to test their "deployment far away" like how many persons they will need on the ground per aircraft, how long the paint will survive, how they react to hot environment ... and not the electronics.

Nato force are present in the eastern europe they can try their radars on most nato fighters their.

We should wait an official statement that will probably come in few days. All hypotesis are true for what they are testing

Isos wrote:

Are they the same configuration per radar? Don't know. That's all I know. Could be different radar config altogether to test. But that wouldn't make much sense.

Maybe they just want to test their "deployment far away" like how many persons they will need on the ground per aircraft, how long the paint will survive, how they react to hot environment ... and not the electronics.

Nato force are present in the eastern europe they can try their radars on most nato fighters their.

We should wait an official statement that will probably come in few days. All hypotesis are true for what they are testing

They can, but due to sensor fusion, the Radar is much needed. However the configuration of said radar is between the two units (be it lets say 1000 T/R modules vs 1500 T/R Modules, of 10W GaAS or 5W GaAS) is to be determined.

They wouldn't bother bringing it to Syria without testing everything out on it. As for picking up radar signals, well, all fighter jets will let that info off and nothing special about the enemy picking it up as they will be able to pick it up regardless if its in Syria or not. Hiding such stuff is pointless. Whats secretive is how they communicate with the rest of the systems. Hence why it was dangerous for US to use F-22's in Syria as well, but its about the same.

miketheterrible wrote:

Isos wrote:

Are they the same configuration per radar? Don't know. That's all I know. Could be different radar config altogether to test. But that wouldn't make much sense.

Maybe they just want to test their "deployment far away" like how many persons they will need on the ground per aircraft, how long the paint will survive, how they react to hot environment ... and not the electronics.

Nato force are present in the eastern europe they can try their radars on most nato fighters their.

We should wait an official statement that will probably come in few days. All hypotesis are true for what they are testing

They can, but due to sensor fusion, the Radar is much needed.  However the configuration of said radar is between the two units (be it lets say 1000 T/R modules vs 1500 T/R Modules, of 10W GaAS or 5W GaAS) is to be determined.

They wouldn't bother bringing it to Syria without testing everything out on it.  As for picking up radar signals, well, all fighter jets will let that info off and nothing special about the enemy picking it up as they will be able to pick it up regardless if its in Syria or not.  Hiding such stuff is pointless.  Whats secretive is how they communicate with the rest of the systems.  Hence why it was dangerous for US to use F-22's in Syria as well, but its about the same.

What's the point of getting informations about a radar frequency? We already know what frequency band all of them use so jamers can be just made for those frequencies and analyze the signal in real time and jam it . Most fighters use X band. It's not like if you pick up a radar signal when it operates for 10 sec that you can make a jammer that will work 100% against it. They shift randomly frequency very fast and they are aesa which means they use lot of frequencies at the same time. Knowing it should be enough for the guy who make the jammers.

There were reports of su-30 locking on a f-16, and they may also used it to detect a f-22.

Isos wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

Isos wrote:

Are they the same configuration per radar? Don't know. That's all I know. Could be different radar config altogether to test. But that wouldn't make much sense.

Maybe they just want to test their "deployment far away" like how many persons they will need on the ground per aircraft, how long the paint will survive, how they react to hot environment ... and not the electronics.

Nato force are present in the eastern europe they can try their radars on most nato fighters their.

We should wait an official statement that will probably come in few days. All hypotesis are true for what they are testing

They can, but due to sensor fusion, the Radar is much needed.  However the configuration of said radar is between the two units (be it lets say 1000 T/R modules vs 1500 T/R Modules, of 10W GaAS or 5W GaAS) is to be determined.

They wouldn't bother bringing it to Syria without testing everything out on it.  As for picking up radar signals, well, all fighter jets will let that info off and nothing special about the enemy picking it up as they will be able to pick it up regardless if its in Syria or not.  Hiding such stuff is pointless.  Whats secretive is how they communicate with the rest of the systems.  Hence why it was dangerous for US to use F-22's in Syria as well, but its about the same.

What's the point of getting informations about a radar frequency? We already know what frequency band all of them use so jamers can be just made for those frequencies and analyze the signal in real time and jam it . Most fighters use X band. It's not like if you pick up a radar signal when it operates for 10 sec that you can make a jammer that will work 100% against it. They shift randomly frequency very fast and they are aesa which means they use lot of frequencies at the same time. Knowing it should be enough for the guy who make the jammers.

There were reports of su-30 locking on a f-16, and they may also used it to detect a f-22.

yes and no. They already know what ranges (ghz) that these radars operate at as well. Point is, a jammer that produces more in terms of output in frequency will jam it, in this regard, modern airborn based jammers are enough to jam the AESA radar anyway. Hence why now other jets have ECM/ECCM's to be able to counter that. Its a forever game of countermeasure and counter counter measure and what not.

They may even use the radar at random too, and it would be rather difficult to determine what is letting off those signals. For instance, those Su-57's could be flying with Su-35's as example.

Let me remind you, it took a VERY long time for Su-35 to enter service. Did you know they only really entered service a couple years ago? Because there were a lot of deficits found with it and even in Syria they found more. So whats better than to test the whole thing out in Syria? Go back, look at what worked well and what didn't, then fix what needed to be fixed prior to actual production. Which let me remind you, production wont actually start till end of this year/next year. So it gives some time to find those deficits.

What's interesting is that the Su-57's don't seem to require any unusual special care. They're parked with the rest of the aircraft....no sign of airconditioned hangars in sight

Cyberspec wrote:What's interesting is that the Su-57's don't seem to require any unusual special care. They're parked with the rest of the aircraft....no sign of airconditioned hangars in sight

Soviet/russian doctrine. They would never create a figjter that has to be stored in special conditions. Its one of the principle point that russian airforce asks for new jets.

miketheterrible wrote:Please, spare us the stupidity.

There was 1 with structural issues. Fixed
There was 1 engine that burned out. Fixed
Pogosyan had only partial aspect to the program. Overall, he was replaced regardless. 1 man didn't control the company.
1 avionics been ready for a while. It was engines that they we're waiting for.

That's what I thought too, but he must have some sources for that stuff. The article really makes the situation look bad (no shit, but that's even the case when you don't include all the subjective nonsense about the bad design, not stealthy enough, etc). And sadly, all those issues would explain the recent reports that were discussed recently, if even some of them are atleast partially true (all of that certainly ain't).

Cyberspec wrote:What's interesting is that the Su-57's don't seem to require any unusual special care. They're parked with the rest of the aircraft....no sign of airconditioned hangars in sight

Well..almost.
A protective barrier is errected around the luxury toy



- much like the one seen once on TV for Su-25

Interview with Rogozin on PAK-FA program and others

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3558424

- How are the tests of the new generation of equipment going? He is interested in PAKFA, "Armata".

- According to PAKFA the situation is as follows: the first stage of the tests is completed, the work carried out has allowed to confirm the correctness of the decisions taken in the part of the airframe, the complex of airborne equipment, providing systems and equipment, and aviation weapons. The second stage will be completed in 2019. At the same time, the military will receive an installation lot to connect to the test program.

miketheterrible wrote:Please, spare us the stupidity.

There was 1 with structural issues. Fixed
There was 1 engine that burned out. Fixed
Pogosyan had only partial aspect to the program. Overall, he was replaced regardless. 1 man didn't control the company.
1 avionics been ready for a while. It was engines that they we're waiting for.

He never said he agrees with article, he just asked about claims so no need to get agitated

Honestly, I am grateful someone took the pain of reading that stuff upon himself and spared us the suffering

PapaDragon wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Please, spare us the stupidity.

There was 1 with structural issues. Fixed
There was 1 engine that burned out. Fixed
Pogosyan had only partial aspect to the program. Overall, he was replaced regardless. 1 man didn't control the company.
1 avionics been ready for a while. It was engines that they we're waiting for.

He never said he agrees with article, he just asked about claims so no need to get agitated

Honestly, I am grateful someone took the pain of reading that stuff upon himself and spared us the suffering

Issue is, little had to do with facts. Yes, 1 had structural issue and 1 had 1 of it's 2 engines burn. But, both were repaired. Article made it sound like all had them. Then said avionics wasn't ready which is a flat out like as they been ready and tested since 2012 which was posted on here. Then made it sound like without Pogosyan, program is doomed.

It's nonsense and even people at another forum laughed at it. People who are actually in the know of the development of pak fa. Even Austins article disproves a lot of the claims.

There just needs to be what one considers as being able to not bother other with such nonsense. But I agree, no need to be agitated over it.

Anyway, apparently Su-57 will not be using it's missiles in Syria. It's entirely to be testing it's systems/sensors and Electronic warfare.

Cyberspec wrote:What's interesting is that the Su-57's don't seem to require any unusual special care. They're parked with the rest of the aircraft....no sign of airconditioned hangars in sight

Every aicraft needs special care, Soviets-Russians tho never were much of a caring type. You can see even today dozens of new Su-34s standing on tormac with just cerade thrown over the cockpit.

Its not a doctrine its called an issue which all Slavic nations have, basically not giving a fuck. We had MiG-21s decomissioned at one point in 90s due to rust, not their flight hours or fatigue, rust.

The Ministry of Defense tells why the Su-57 was sent to Syria

Moscow. The Russian military transferred Su-57 fighters to Syria in order to test the machines in maximal combat conditions.

According to sources in the defense industry, several Su-57 fighters were transferred to Syria, which are going to test the electronic warfare and radar systems.

It is reported that the decision to commit the Su-57 was made after a closed display of the fighter at the avia-salon in Zhukovsky. Experts note that Russia sent the Su-57 also in order to demonstrate the capabilities of the Defense Industrial Complex to potential buyers.

Recall, the first time news that the latest Russian fighter aircraft was in Syria was published on the network on February 21-22.
As the Colonel Viktor Murakhovsky, editor-in-chief of Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine, a member of the expert council of the board of the Military-Industrial Commission of the Russian Federation, told Pravda.ru this fifth-generation fighter has several advantages over previous models: it is barely noticeable on radar screens and armed with the newest ammunition, a set of aviation weapons, which is located "exclusively inside the fuselage." "This reduces fuel consumption for flights at cruising speeds, increases range by reducing air resistance and provides the very low visibility on radars," the expert said to Pravdy.Ru.

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/02/defense-ministrys-further-rationale-for.html

PapaDragon wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Please, spare us the stupidity.

There was 1 with structural issues. Fixed
There was 1 engine that burned out. Fixed
Pogosyan had only partial aspect to the program. Overall, he was replaced regardless. 1 man didn't control the company.
1 avionics been ready for a while. It was engines that they we're waiting for.

He never said he agrees with article, he just asked about claims so no need to get agitated

Honestly, I am grateful someone took the pain of reading that stuff upon himself and spared us the suffering

Exactly. And even I think a large part of it was obvious BS, despite me being quite pessimistic about the program recently. But there were just some claims that I had never heard before.

And indeed, the trigger warning was for a reason. According to the article, the Su-57 program is a total failure, period. Despite having like a dozen prototypes, everything is delayed, nothing has been tested and nothing works. The airframe is badly designed, Indians hate it, but the Russians still need their funding... Yeah, all of that BS in a single article, but additionally some new, really quite extreme, claims. I guess that's the summary + my earlier comment.

Miketheterrible, can you give a link to that forum discussion? Thanks.

Kimppis wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Please, spare us the stupidity.

There was 1 with structural issues. Fixed
There was 1 engine that burned out. Fixed
Pogosyan had only partial aspect to the program. Overall, he was replaced regardless. 1 man didn't control the company.
1 avionics been ready for a while. It was engines that they we're waiting for.

He never said he agrees with article, he just asked about claims so no need to get agitated

Honestly, I am grateful someone took the pain of reading that stuff upon himself and spared us the suffering

Exactly. And even I think a large part of it was obvious BS, despite me being quite pessimistic about the program recently. But there were just some claims that I had never heard before.

And indeed, the trigger warning was for a reason. According to the article, the Su-57 program is a total failure, period. Despite having like a dozen prototypes, everything is delayed, nothing has been tested and nothing works. The airframe is badly designed, Indians hate it, but the Russians still need their funding... Yeah, all of that BS in a single article, but additionally some new, really quite extreme, claims. I guess that's the summary + my earlier comment.

Miketheterrible, can you give a link to that forum discussion? Thanks.

Keypub forums. Can't link. Rules.

It was just brief radar test after all. Still, nice move in right direction, with so many random military aircraft in the area it was perfect environment for this:

5th-gen Russian Su-57 fighters performed 2 days of combat tests in Syria – Defense Minister

https://www.rt.com/news/420188-russian-su57-fighter-jets-syria/

Following media speculation about Russia’s fifth-generation Su-57 fighter jets, Russia’s defense minister has confirmed two were deployed for tests in Syria. However, they were there for just two days for combat and other tests.

“They really were there. Not for long, just two days. Over this time they conducted a trial program, including a combat trial,” Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu told journalists on Thursday.

“There were two jets which were accompanied by laboratory aircraft, and planes which monitored the work of weapon systems.”

Earlier reports, based on footage purportedly showing the aircraft in Syria and interpretation of Israeli satellite images, claimed that four Su-57s had been deployed to the Russian airbase at Khmeimim.

“I can tell you that the trial was successful; the planes returned home a week ago,” Shoigu added. “As for the photos which were published, I don’t know where they came from. The planes were inside hangars all the time [when parked].”

The minister added that the full trial program of the advanced aircraft will be completed this year

I was hoping to see some bombs but oh well, maybe next time...

Kimppis wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Please, spare us the stupidity.

There was 1 with structural issues. Fixed
There was 1 engine that burned out. Fixed
Pogosyan had only partial aspect to the program. Overall, he was replaced regardless. 1 man didn't control the company.
1 avionics been ready for a while. It was engines that they we're waiting for.

That's what I thought too, but he must have some sources for that stuff. The article really makes the situation look bad (no shit, but that's even the case when you don't include all the subjective nonsense about the bad design, not stealthy enough, etc). And sadly, all those issues would explain the recent reports that were discussed recently, if even some of them are atleast partially true (all of that certainly ain't).

Did you seriously dredge up that garbage article and bring it up here ? What the hell is wrong with you ?

Kimppis wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Please, spare us the stupidity.

There was 1 with structural issues. Fixed
There was 1 engine that burned out. Fixed
Pogosyan had only partial aspect to the program. Overall, he was replaced regardless. 1 man didn't control the company.
1 avionics been ready for a while. It was engines that they we're waiting for.

He never said he agrees with article, he just asked about claims so no need to get agitated

Honestly, I am grateful someone took the pain of reading that stuff upon himself and spared us the suffering

Exactly. And even I think a large part of it was obvious BS, despite me being quite pessimistic about the program recently. But there were just some claims that I had never heard before.

And indeed, the trigger warning was for a reason. According to the article, the Su-57 program is a total failure, period. Despite having like a dozen prototypes, everything is delayed, nothing has been tested and nothing works. The airframe is badly designed, Indians hate it, but the Russians still need their funding... Yeah, all of that BS in a single article, but additionally some new, really quite extreme, claims. I guess that's the summary + my earlier comment.

Miketheterrible, can you give a link to that forum discussion? Thanks.

I joined this forum to get away from the sludge at the very bottom of the barrel and you are posting it here ? And you are slowly trying to imply that there is a kernel of truth in it.

If you took the time to do a tid bit of research you would see that the author is a total anti Russian propagandist of the worst kind. Just look at his previous article where he bashes and mocks the deceased pilot of the su 25 in Syria.

I didn't know that he was that bad. But now that I think about that article, it does make sense. I expected the War is Boring to have some standards (and I do mean some, nothing more), considering it isn't the most mainstream of MSM (like CNN, Fox News or Business Insider). And please don't be so overdramatic, atleast I didn't copy paste the actual article. So he ridiculed the capabilities of the Su-25 or what? Don't worry, I won't be reading that article.

Kimppis wrote:I didn't know that he was that bad. But now that I think about that article, it does make sense. I expected the War is Boring to have some standards (and I do mean some, nothing more), considering it isn't the most mainstream of MSM (like CNN, Fox News or Business Insider). And please don't be so overdramatic, atleast I didn't copy paste the actual article. So he ridiculed the capabilities of the Su-25 or what? Don't worry, I won't be reading that article.  

He ridiculed the dead Russian pilot.

Real missile launch or computer edited one at 0:40?



RT article

That was a CGI showed long ago. No idea why they put it there. I think just an oportunistic reason.

Manov wrote:That was a CGI showed long ago. No idea why they put it there. I think just an oportunistic reason.

New in the forum, greetings to all!

Could you explain why it is a CGI? Looks perfectly real to me...